Jump to content

Now That's What I Call Transfer Rumours! 7


Rich

Recommended Posts

From my point of view we would have been relegated if we had not signed him, of course the argument is we could have purchased someone else. Do I think we could have made a move for a better striker? Yes I do, but obviously Eddie thought he was the best option available at the time. He played a part in keeping us up. I would not shed a tear however if he was sold this month.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, RobsonsWonderland said:

Of the three where would  you place them on the Chris Wood Transfer Rating Scale?

 

1. Rubbish player never wanted him

2. average player but Eddie could work his magic.

3. Don't rate him... But when we sign him, I will pretend he has always been quality?

 

1. McSauce 2. Gordon, 3. Tielemans

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your scale is wrong. Gordon is above average and Tielemans is an excellent footballer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

If he gets dribbled past a lot his tackling can't be good? :lol:

 

He wins a lot of tackles, more than Longstaff for example. But he does get dribbled past more often, maybe because something to do with his ability when he's on the back foot or has to readjust. Longstaff does too. 

 

He's obviously a lot more creative than anyone we have though, crosses and expected assists etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tisd09 said:

From my point of view we would have been relegated if we had not signed him, of course the argument is we could have purchased someone else. Do I think we could have made a move for a better striker? Yes I do, but obviously Eddie thought he was the best option available at the time. He played a part in keeping us up. I would not shed a tear however if he was sold this month.

 

 

:thup: 

 

What's done is done now. We all agree he has no future here, I think that's fair to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I really think that it wouldn't have made much different if we'd just played Gayle, but I don't have the tactical or stats knowledge to prove it.

The fact Gayle has been struggling to get a regular game for a team 20th in the Championship this season would probably suggest otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, SteV said:

Absolute garbage.

 

He was overpriced, of course, but we knew and accepted that.

 

He was brought in to achieve a specific objective (helping us stay in the league), which he achieved with flying colours.

 

Anything useful he does subsequently, like scoring the winner in a League Cup match (that’s then seen us make the semi final), or scoring at Southampton and Leicester, is simply a bonus, aside from the less obvious stuff around his tactical performance.

 

He’s not good enough for where we want to get to, and he’ll be phased out soon enough, but he’s done his job to enable us to get there. Money well spent.

If we had paid 10m for Wood we would have overpaid, the fact we paid 25m was ridiculous and has set a nasty precedent for the club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

I'm not sure Wood would walk the championship TBH :lol:

 

I get the point though. 

I reckon he’d get 10-15 no bother.

 

But without wanting to disrespect Gayle too much as was generally a really good contributor over his time here, his last contract renewal was one of the laziest acts of the whole Ashley era.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Away Toon said:

If we had paid 10m for Wood we would have overpaid, the fact we paid 25m was ridiculous and has set a nasty precedent for the club.

Getting relegated would probably have been a worse precedent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Skeletor said:

Don't know why people have such an issue admitting Wood was a bad signing. His stats speak for themselves. It's possible to think Howe is doing God's work, whilst admitting he made one stinker of a signing. All good managers have their flops.

 

 

 

A signing that didn’t work out long term yes, but he did the job he was brought in to do for that run to the end of the season. There isn’t just two ends to the scale here, to some it seems like there’s only two extremes - either a shit signing or a great one. Wood falls into the middle somewhere, did what we needed but could we have got more for that money? Probably but the key with Wood is we went for him because he had a clause that we caught knowledge of, clubs would have tried ripping us off otherwise due to the situation we were in.
 

We went for a PL proven available striker at short notice and it paid off.. the player just hasn’t scored as many as people would have liked and obviously could have done better. I wouldn’t like to guess what might have happened had we not signed him.

 

Has nothing to do with being emotionally clouded by Howe, its looking at a signing for what it is. 

 

 

Edited by Nine

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not Wood's biggest fan but he was a 1 in 3 striker in the Prem, from a team battling relegation. No way they would've let him go for £10M. I was browsing the Burnley forums when we bid for him and the general gist was he was worth around £15m-£18M which sounds about plausible. His numbers were very similar to Wilson's before he came here (not stating he's as good as Wilson btw just goals scored). We overpaid for him for sure but you could understand the logic behind the signing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Away Toon said:

If we had paid 10m for Wood we would have overpaid, the fact we paid 25m was ridiculous and has set a nasty precedent for the club.

 

I really don't think it has made any difference in regards to the future.

 

We would always be quoted crazy prices because of the Saudis, all it showed that we could act quickly and decisively when we really felt it was necessary. We only paid 25m because we had to activate the clause so they couldn't say no. It wasn't negotiation. 

 

Bad player but understandable signing and correct decision at the time. IMO.

 

 

Edited by AyeDubbleYoo

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Away Toon said:

If we had paid 10m for Wood we would have overpaid, the fact we paid 25m was ridiculous and has set a nasty precedent for the club.

 

ana the horror of him helping us stay up and being part of the team sitting in 3rd

 

WHYYYY CHRIS WOOD WHYYYYYYYYYYY

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't remember Chris Wood helping us stay up, it's a myth someone came up with to paper over how shite he is.

 

There was 10 other players and a class manager doing most of it, he was just another number, bang average and over priced.

 

 

Edited by mighty__mag

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mighty__mag said:

I don't remember Chris Wood helping us stay up, it's a myth someone came up with to paper over how shite he is.

 

There was 10 other players and a class manager doing most of it, he was just another number, bang average and over priced.

 

 

 

This is such a mental stance to take. He obviously contributed. Considerably.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't score as much as he should, but (with Wilson gone till we were already safe) Wood allowed us to implement an effective style of play that ultimately helped us stay up. Now if you want to talk about why we used Wood for this and now Weighorst, who it turns out was available for half the price, that's a conversation to be had. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...